Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Return of Mac Clones?

EricNau said:
I don't get it.
The main reason why people don't buy Mac is because of the OS (I've never heard anyone say they don't like Apple Hardware).
Everyone I know loves the hardware of Apple, just not the OS (mostly because it isn't as compatible as Windows).
Putting OS X on a Dell wouldn't change any of this, would it? It would still be the same OS, just on a cheaper "piece of junk."
Correct me if Im wrong, but putting OS X on a PC wouldn't suddenly make everything compatible with it.
Click to expand...

You're probably right, "All my friend have got a PC, I would be not able to communicate with them if I had a Mac." "My law school software is not compatible with MAC" "Microsoft Project doesn't runs at MAC"
But, popular stuff are not always best stuff.
If OS X is becoming major platform for origin Windows user, it would be not hard to see software developer is working on Mac platform.
 
Could happen.. ..eventually.

Sorry if this has already been brought up, but I certainly believe Apple will allow clones eventually. Heck, they might even move into a "software only" company in a few years time. (Well they'll probably still make iPods though). :p

I actually made this post earlier this year. For those of you who can't be bothered to look it up, here's my "possible roadmap to Apple becomming a software only company:"

1.) 2007: Apple completes the Intel Switch. CPU sales are better than ever, a lot of windows-geeks buy a mac just for the fun of it, knowing they'll be able to install Windows on the great looking box, even if they never get their head around OSX…

2.) 2008-2009: Apple's sales flatten out at around 5-6% of the total market.

3.) 2009-2010: Apple buy a reasonably sized WinPC vendor, allowing this company to make Mac-compatible PC's at the lower end and at a lower cost. This works a charm, further increasing OSX's market-penetration.

4.) 2011-2012: Apple sign a deal with one or two high-profile PC-vendors (SONY? HP?) The companies will start selling Mac-compatible computers.

5.) 2012-2013: Apple's market share is blossoming, and Apple decides to offer "Mac-compatible licenses" to anyone interested.

The following price-war leads to Apple no longer being able to compete in the hardware market. The company decides to scrap it's hardware-division, as licences is by now a big, fat cash-cow…
 
Lord Blackadder said:
As long as Steve Jobs is CEO there will be no clones. It goes against everything he says about an integrated package designed by one company.

If anything gets licensed it will be a product (like the Moto phones) that both enhances public awareness of Apple and does not compete with any existing or planned Apple product.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with you, Steve was the one to kill to original program to begin with. Why allow yourself to relive a painful part of your history that didn't work beforehand.

But it all comes down to marketshare, if you can do it and allow yourself (or at that point your OS) to remain competitive and making money go for it.

But at this point the majority of Apple profit comes from hardware sales (and ipod sales). If you let people put out cheaper parts hardware (for less money) then you are going to lose tons of money.
 
Apple will never become a software only company. They offer something different than the usual PC towers. If anything, I could see a rise to around 6-8% of the market due to the higher quality of the machines and unique designs. Apple can never be HP or Dell, but they'll always be Apple.
 
lopresmb said:
I tend to agree with you, Steve was the one to kill to original program to begin with. Why allow yourself to relive a painful part of your history that didn't work beforehand.
Click to expand...

You mean Apple is going to put out an OS not much better than windows, build the same computers as the wintel makers, and put on a clinic on how not to license your operating system? A lot has changed since 1995. Apple in those days wasn't very innovative and pretty poorly run. They only allowed small companies or those that had never made personal computers before to license the OS. If it wasn't for the clones, some of those users might be running windows right now. Apple's offerings just plain sucked.
 
LethalWolfe said:
Most of the grumblings I see at PC sites is that Macs cost too much. Of course after the Mini came out I read about a lot of people buying them 'cause they are so cheap. Also people didn't like the fact that you can't tweak Macs like you can PCs (few component makers and such), but that's more of a PC enthusiast's gripe, not a Joe Sixpack gripe. And you are correct that putting OS X on a PC wouldn't magically make it run Windows programs.


Lethal
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but putting OS X on a PC wouldn't let it be compatible with 3rd party components either (like graphics cards, etc).
By making a Mac "Clone" the consumer would be buying an uglier version of the Macs already out there, the look would really be the only difference.

I know a lot of people gripe about how expensive Apple Computers are, but really it isn't true, when I've compared prices, they are always within $100 of each other. The main difference is that Apple doesn't make low-end computers.
And how much to windows users spend to get their computers repaired?? Even if your Mac had a problem, any repair at an Apple store that takes less that 30 minutes is free (and most problems on a Mac can be fixed that fast).
 
EricNau said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but putting OS X on a PC wouldn't let it be compatible with 3rd party components either (like graphics cards, etc).
By making a Mac "Clone" the consumer would be buying an uglier version of the Macs already out there, the look would really be the only difference.
Click to expand...

The intel developer boxes are compatible with off the shelf video cards. It's a matter of having no drivers like most of the hardware we don't see on the mac. The only graphics drivers available for OSX86 are for intel GMA900 shared graphics. If more than 5% of the market were running Mac OS X, many companies would rethink their mac support. The exceptions are sound cards and game devices were Apple hasn't made it easy to use them.
 
BenRoethig said:
The intel developer boxes are compatible with off the shelf video cards. It's a matter of having no drivers like most of the hardware we don't see on the mac. The only graphics drivers available for OSX86 are for intel GMA900 shared graphics. If more than 5% of the market were running Mac OS X, many companies would rethink their mac support. The exceptions are sound cards and game devices were Apple hasn't made it easy to use them.
Click to expand...
I'm just worried if people buy a Dell running OS X they are going to expect it to be as compatible. - Maybe the new Intels will be just as compatible.
 
EricNau said:
I'm just worried if people buy a Dell running OS X they are going to expect it to be as compatible. - Maybe the new Intels will be just as compatible.
Click to expand...

If Dell and/or HP announce that they're going to license OS X, things will get compatible in a hurry. It would be in their financial interest to make sure everything works on both windows and OS X.
 
i would hate to see a return of the clones (get me george lucas!!) as the reason the mac is such a pleasure to use is that because apple have complete control over the hardware and software everything can be optimised properly and you never find yourself missing a driver. its the same principle with the ipod, a perfect match of hardware and software.
 
BenRoethig said:
If Dell and/or HP announce that they're going to license OS X, things will get compatible in a hurry. It would be in their financial interest to make sure everything works on both windows and OS X.
Click to expand...
Once Microsoft starts grumbling about the bad things that might happen when their OEM Windows contract expires they'll dump OSX in a heartbeat, much like Dell dropped Linux support. Dell pulled the same stunt with AMD, as I recall: signed a big contract and then immediately dropped it once Intel came around. Any big vendor who signed on for OSX likely does so for leverage against Microsoft, rather than any good-faith effort to sell new and interesting product. That's probably the real reason Jobs won't sell OSX.
 
And watch them get split into about three different companies the next day. That would be a textbook violation of U.S. federal anti-trust laws.
 
Clones for PPC Only?

Why don't they license only the OSX version that works on PPC processors. That way, they would have the hardware advantage (X86) so they could still sell hardware, but they could make $ off the OS as well.
 
Question about sig

(off topic)

Azurael-

I have a question about your signature. You say that you have a Yosemite G3 in a standard ATX case...

How exactly did you get it in there?? And what power supply is it using???

Plus, does OS X recognize the 5200 PCI card?
 
Clones cant innovate.

The major problem with parcelling out manufacturing to third parties is the whole point of Apple at the moment: innovation. They MUST have total control over both the hardware and software to be able to keep up the level of new developments and ideas. If third parties are involved they will simply fight with the development teams on basis of price considerations et al and the **** will hit the fan.

I can see Apple maintaining the hardware for a long while yet. I would'nt be surprised though if a lot of Apples software gets the push to Windows to further push the point of the Apple gear. Maybe even sell Aperture etc to Windows users...would make sense to me...

Anyway, when people see the new Mactels...they'll be creaming their pants..hehe:p
 
Fred Flintstone said:
Clones aren't built in your garage, but they have the same frankensteined mentality. But with the Mac mini, does Apple need clones?
Click to expand...

Frankensteined? PowerComputing was consistently a better / faster machine than it's mac counterpart. Better graphics card, faster processor, better cd-rom. That was one of the best computer manufacturers around before steve put a stop to it. They actaully released the G3 before apple! Actually I don't think any shipped. They were manufactured and ready to go when Apple put a stop to their license. Actually, Apple purchased the license back from them as it still had a few years to go. Apple made them a sweet deal to discontinue operations. But their computers were top notch from the ground up. They had online sales down pat. They had the packaging all cool looking. Their mice and their keyboards were much better too.

The clones were damn good. And they were cheap. That was the problem.

Apple used to have this special hardware software integrated box, but since their machines now are essentially the same as windows boxes, I don't think that's the issue. We've switched to ata, usb2, and standard graphics cards and connectors. Even two button mice. Now we're going to switch to standard motherboards. The fat binaries are what is going to make the hardware integration thing a non-issue.
 
EricNau said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but putting OS X on a PC wouldn't let it be compatible with 3rd party components either (like graphics cards, etc).
By making a Mac "Clone" the consumer would be buying an uglier version of the Macs already out there, the look would really be the only difference.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. By licensing Mac OS X to, say, Dell, Apple can allow the consumer to buy the Mac that Apple can't make a profit on. I mean a beige box with mediocre parts and a 2.4 GHz P4 and 500 MB of DDR memory.

This kind of machine is a very good seller, because it can do everything most people need. Such a machine would even run Aperture and Photoshop well. Apple doesn't make it because it can't make a profit on it. Instead it sells novelty items like the iMac and mini. Dell can and does make a profit on such machines.

Apple could tell Dell what kind of machines it can sell, and it can dictate some kind of differentiator from other Dell products such as color.
 
In my opinion allowing mac clones will do nothing more than nearly destroy apples hardware development. With cheap machines available from say dell alot less people will purchase a genuine macintosh. For someone like me who loves apples hardware I don't want to see this happen.

those pics don't really prove much the shot is too blurry to see the specs of the machine and if you think about it there could just be a mac mini hiding out of camera that the screen is plugged into.
I made a pretty convincing pic of my own of my asus laptop. I just took a screen shot off my mac in the correct resolution and put it in slideshow mode. A video would be better.
 
MyLeftNut said:
The major problem with parcelling out manufacturing to third parties is the whole point of Apple at the moment: innovation. They MUST have total control over both the hardware and software to be able to keep up the level of new developments and ideas. If third parties are involved they will simply fight with the development teams on basis of price considerations et al and the **** will hit the fan.

I can see Apple maintaining the hardware for a long while yet. I would'nt be surprised though if a lot of Apples software gets the push to Windows to further push the point of the Apple gear. Maybe even sell Aperture etc to Windows users...would make sense to me...

Anyway, when people see the new Mactels...they'll be creaming their pants..hehe:p
Click to expand...

Try thinking of Apple the hardware company as a separate entity from the Mac OS X operating system. Apple and the mainstream PC manufacturers are on two distinctly different hardware tracks. While Apple's designs no not appeal to most, Mac OS X the operating system has universal appeal. For the most part the current windows crowd will buy the towers and the Mac crowd will buy what Apple sells. Why? Because its what they like and what fits their needs.
 
Dell

osX will eventually support all PC's with the label "Made for osX" or something similar, Apple is going to be huge in the next few years. :D
 
Bonte said:
osX will eventually support all PC's with the label "Made for osX" or something similar, Apple is going to be huge in the next few years. :D
Click to expand...
I don't think computers will ever say "Made for OS X" - that's what software should say.
I think the computers would be more likely to say something like "Mac OS X Edition"

But you are right, Apple will be huge in the next few years!
(But I still don't think they should make OS X available for anything but an Apple Computer.)
 
Now is the time.

For the record I hope licencing OSX to 3rd parties doesn't happen.

I got into this late so I don't know if anyone else nentioned this..... If Apple was to do this now is the time. The transition to x86 chips, MS Vista a year off, Apple at an all time high with mass appeal due to the Ipod, the promise of no virus's to tired XP users, yada yada yada.

I don't know of a better time to do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back